MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Wildlife Report No. 3639 June 2017 A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Michigan Project W-147-R Equal Rights for Natural Resource Users The Michigan Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunities for employment and access to Michigan's natural resources. Both State and Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, disability, age, sex, height, weight or marital status under the U.S. Civil Rights Acts of 1964 as amended, 1976 MI PA 453, 1976 MI PA 220, Title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended, and the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire additional information, please write: Human Resources, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, PO Box 30473, Lansing MI 48909-7973, or Michigan Department of Civil Rights, Cadillac Place, 3054 West Grand Blvd, Suite 3-600, Detroit, MI 48202, or Division of Federal Assistance, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop MBSP-4020, Arlington, VA 22203. For information or assistance on this publication, contact Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, P.O. Box 30444, MI 48909. This publication is available in alternative formats upon request. Michigan Deer Harvest Survey Report 2016 Seasons Brian J. Frawley ABSTRACT A survey of deer hunters was conducted following the 2016 hunting seasons to estimate hunter participation, harvest, and hunting effort. In 2016, an estimated 585,994 hunters spent 8.2 million days afield. Statewide, the number of people hunting decreased significantly by nearly 4% between 2015 and 2016. Hunters harvested about 348,000 deer. Harvest was not significantly different from 2015. Statewide, 44% of hunters harvested a deer in 2016. About 20% of hunters took an antlerless deer and 31% took an antlered buck in 2016. Approximately 13% of deer hunters harvested two or more deer of any type. About 4% of hunters statewide harvested two antlered bucks. Levels of satisfaction with numbers of deer seen, bucks seen, and overall experience increased significantly in 2016 from 2015, while satisfaction with the number of deer harvested was not significantly changed. Statewide, 48% of hunters were satisfied with their overall hunting experience in 2015, and satisfaction was highest in the Lower Peninsula. About 193,137 hunters used a crossbow during the 2016 archery season, and they harvested approximately 74,130 deer with the crossbow. About 14% fewer individuals purchased a deer hunting license in 2016 than ten years ago in 2006. Although the overall number of license buyers declined from 2006, an increased number of people younger than 12 years of age and people older than 53 purchased a license in 2016. About 11% of the license buyers in 2016 were younger than 17 years old. Most hunters (71%) approved or strongly approved of people hunting deer with bait. Statewide, most deer hunters (59%) supported regional antler-point restrictions. In addition, most hunters (56%) supported allowing hunters to take two bucks in any combination of seasons if one of those bucks has at least four antler points on one antler. Most deer hunters (85%) supported maintaining the November 15 opening date for the regular firearm season.
63
Embed
2016 Michigan Deer Harvest Survey Report · MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Wildlife Report No. 3639 June 2017 A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Michigan
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Wildlife Report No. 3639
June 2017
A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Michigan Project W-147-R
Equal Rights for Natural Resource Users The Michigan Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunities for employment and access to Michigan's natural resources. Both State and Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, disability, age, sex, height, weight or marital status under the U.S. Civil Rights Acts of 1964 as amended, 1976 MI PA 453, 1976 MI PA 220, Title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended, and the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire additional information, please write: Human Resources, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, PO Box 30473, Lansing MI 48909-7973, or Michigan Department of Civil Rights, Cadillac Place, 3054 West Grand Blvd, Suite 3-600, Detroit, MI 48202, or Division of Federal Assistance, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop MBSP-4020, Arlington, VA 22203.
For information or assistance on this publication, contact Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, P.O. Box 30444, MI 48909. This publication is available in alternative formats upon request.
Michigan Deer Harvest Survey Report 2016 Seasons
Brian J. Frawley
ABSTRACT A survey of deer hunters was conducted following the 2016 hunting seasons to estimate hunter participation, harvest, and hunting effort. In 2016, an estimated 585,994 hunters spent 8.2 million days afield. Statewide, the number of people hunting decreased significantly by nearly 4% between 2015 and 2016. Hunters harvested about 348,000 deer. Harvest was not significantly different from 2015. Statewide, 44% of hunters harvested a deer in 2016. About 20% of hunters took an antlerless deer and 31% took an antlered buck in 2016. Approximately 13% of deer hunters harvested two or more deer of any type. About 4% of hunters statewide harvested two antlered bucks. Levels of satisfaction with numbers of deer seen, bucks seen, and overall experience increased significantly in 2016 from 2015, while satisfaction with the number of deer harvested was not significantly changed. Statewide, 48% of hunters were satisfied with their overall hunting experience in 2015, and satisfaction was highest in the Lower Peninsula. About 193,137 hunters used a crossbow during the 2016 archery season, and they harvested approximately 74,130 deer with the crossbow. About 14% fewer individuals purchased a deer hunting license in 2016 than ten years ago in 2006. Although the overall number of license buyers declined from 2006, an increased number of people younger than 12 years of age and people older than 53 purchased a license in 2016. About 11% of the license buyers in 2016 were younger than 17 years old. Most hunters (71%) approved or strongly approved of people hunting deer with bait. Statewide, most deer hunters (59%) supported regional antler-point restrictions. In addition, most hunters (56%) supported allowing hunters to take two bucks in any combination of seasons if one of those bucks has at least four antler points on one antler. Most deer hunters (85%) supported maintaining the November 15 opening date for the regular firearm season.
2
INTRODUCTION The Natural Resources Commission (NRC) and Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) have the authority and responsibility to protect and manage the wildlife resources of the state of Michigan. Harvest surveys are one of the management tools used to accomplish this statutory responsibility. Estimating hunter participation, harvest, and hunting effort (hereafter referred to as estimates) are the primary objectives of these surveys. Estimates derived from harvest surveys as well as information from deer (Odocoileus virginianus) harvest check stations, trends in deer-vehicle collisions, population modeling, and input received from the public are used to monitor deer populations and establish harvest regulations. Estimating harvest, hunter numbers, and hunting effort were the primary objectives of the deer harvest survey. This survey also provided an opportunity to collect information about management issues. Questions were added to the questionnaire to investigate hunter satisfaction with the 2016 hunting season and deer numbers. Deer hunters were also asked their opinions about hunting deer with bait, the opening date of the regular firearm season, and antler point restrictions. Deer were grouped into either antlered or antlerless deer when developing hunting regulations. Antlered deer included deer with at least one antler three inches or longer, and antlerless deer included deer without antlers and deer with antlers less than 3 inches in length. The type of deer that could be harvested by hunters depended upon the area hunted, hunting season, and license purchased (Table 1). During 2016, deer could be harvested primarily during the following hunting seasons: Liberty, archery, regular firearm, muzzleloader, early antlerless, late antlerless, and Independence. In order to harvest a deer, hunters had to possess a hunting license (deer, combination, antlerless, or mentored youth license) (Table 1). A harvest tag was issued as part of the hunting license. Deer, mentored youth, and antlerless licenses included one harvest tag, while combination licenses had two harvest tags. Hunters could purchase a maximum of two licenses for taking antlered deer. Hunters wanting to harvest only one antlered deer could purchase a single deer license (one kill tag), while hunters wanting to take two antlered deer could purchase a combination license (two kill tags). Hunters who purchased a single deer license could not purchase a second deer license or a combination license. If a hunter took two antlered deer, one needed to have at least one antler with four or more points (qualifying points must be at least one inch), except for deer taken by mentored youth hunters or in the chronic wasting disease (CWD) core zone. A person with a mentored youth license could use their one harvest tag to take a deer of either sex during the archery, regular firearm, muzzleloader, or Liberty seasons. Antlerless licenses could be purchased in addition to deer, mentored youth, or combination licenses. Antlerless deer licenses allowed hunters to take antlerless deer during any season
3
with equipment appropriate for the season. Use of each antlerless license was restricted to a single DMU designated at the time of purchase. Antlerless licenses were available for most of the state, except in nineteen DMUs (007, 017, 021, 022, 027, 031, 036, 042, 048, 066, 117, 121, 127, 131, 152, 249, 252, 255, and 349) in the UP. A limited number of antlerless licenses were issued specifically for either public or private lands. Public land antlerless licenses were not available in all DMUs that had private land licenses. A public-land antlerless deer license was required to hunt antlerless deer on Commercial Forest land. The number of licenses available in DMUs open to antlerless deer hunting was established by the NRC (Appendix A). Hunters could apply for an antlerless license through the drawing, purchase a private land license for selected areas without application, or wait to purchase a leftover license after the drawing, if available. A private land antlerless deer hunting license was valid for taking antlerless deer only from privately-owned lands within the DMU specified on the license with landowner permission. A private land license was not valid on land enrolled in the Commercial Forest Act program (Commercial Forest Lands). A public land antlerless deer hunting license allowed an individual to hunt for antlerless deer upon publicly-owned lands (including state, federal, and county lands) open to hunting and Commercial Forest Lands within the DMU for which it was issued. A public land license was invalid on any privately-owned lands except Commercial Forest Lands. Hunters could purchase two antlerless deer licenses each day until the quota had been met, except for licenses valid in DMUs 333, 419, 452, and 487. For DMUs 333 and 419, an individual could purchase an unlimited number of antlerless deer licenses per calendar day. For DMUs 452 and 487, an individual could purchase a maximum of five antlerless deer licenses per calendar day until the quota had been met. For DMUs 333 and 419, an individual could purchase an unlimited number of antlerless deer licenses for the entire year. For DMU 487, an individual could purchase a maximum of ten private land antlerless deer licenses for all seasons combined until the quota has been met. For all other DMUs, an individual could purchase up to a season limit of five private land antlerless deer licenses until the quota has been met. In addition, there was no seasonal limit for public land antlerless licenses in any DMU where licenses were available. Deer Management Unit 487 included private land in DMUs 001, 004, 035, 060, 068, 071, 135 and 452. A private land antlerless deer license for DMU 487 was valid on private land within any of the eight subunits. The Pure Michigan Hunt (PMH) was a unique multi-species hunting opportunity offered for the first time in 2010. Individuals could purchase an unlimited number of applications for the PMH. Three individuals were randomly chosen from all applications, and winners received elk, bear, spring turkey, fall turkey, and antlerless deer hunting licenses and could participate in a reserved waterfowl hunt on a managed waterfowl area. The antlerless deer hunting license was valid for all areas open for hunting antlerless deer and during all deer hunting seasons in which they were eligible to participate.
4
Deer Management Assistance (DMA) permits were special antlerless permits issued to landowners where the number of antlerless licenses was insufficient to meet the objective of specific landowners (e.g., controlling crop damage). These permits allowed hunters to take one antlerless deer per permit during any deer season on the land where issued or adjacent private lands with the landowner’s permission. To use these permits, the hunter also must have purchased a valid deer hunting license for the season in which they were hunting and abide by all other hunting regulations. Managed Deer Hunt permits were antlerless permits that could be used during special seasons on some public lands (e.g., state parks, state wildlife areas, and some federal land). These permits were issued by special random drawings. To use these permits, the hunter also must have purchased a valid deer hunting license and abide by all other hunting regulations. The Liberty Season was held during September 17-18 on public and private lands statewide. Youth (less than 17 years old) and disabled hunters could take no more than one deer during the season. Eligible disabled hunters included hunters issued a permit to use a laser-sighting device or to hunt from a standing vehicle, veterans with 100% disability as defined by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, or legally blind people could participate in this season. Hunters could take one deer of either sex using a deer or combination license, and antler point restrictions did not apply to taking antlered deer. Only an antlerless deer could be taken with an antlerless license or DMA permit. Youth less than 14 years of age could hunt with archery and crossbow equipment on public or private lands or with a firearm on private or Commercial Forest lands only. All hunters under age 17 hunting with a firearm had to be accompanied by a parent, guardian or someone designated by their parent or guardian. In addition, hunters under 10 years of age had to be licensed through the Mentored Youth Hunting Program and accompanied by a qualified mentor. The archery season occurred statewide on public and private lands. This season was divided into early and late segments (October 1 through November 14 and December 1, 2016, through January 1, 2017). Deer licenses, antlerless deer licenses, combination licenses, mentored youth licenses, and DMA permits could be used to take deer during the archery seasons using archery equipment. Deer could also be taken during the Independence Hunt October 13-16, 2016. Hunters could take one deer of either sex on private lands or public lands requiring an access permit. Hunters could use a deer or combination license, and antler point restrictions did not apply to taking antlered deer. Only an antlerless deer could be taken with an antlerless license or DMA permit. Only hunters that were issued a permit to use a laser-sighting device or to hunt from a standing vehicle; veterans with 100% disability as defined by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs; or legally blind people could participate in this season. The statewide regular firearm season occurred November 15-30. The muzzleloader season was held December 2-11 in the UP and Northern LP, and December 2-18 in the Southern LP. Hunters were allowed to take deer on both public and private lands with mentored youth,
5
deer and deer combo hunting licenses during the regular firearm and muzzleloader seasons. Antlerless licenses (including DMA permits) also could be used during the firearm seasons. The early antlerless firearm season occurred from September 17-18. Hunters pursuing deer during this season had to purchase an antlerless or mentored youth license, possess an unused antlerless harvest tag (including DMA permits), and were limited to hunting on private land. The area open to hunting during the early antlerless season was limited to all or portions of 37 counties in the LP (Alcona, Alpena, Antrim, Arenac, Bay, Benzie, Charlevoix, Clinton, Eaton, Genesee, Grand Traverse, Hillsdale, Huron, Ingham, Ionia, Iosco, Isabella, Jackson, Lapeer, Leelanau, Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, Manistee, Midland, Monroe, Montmorency, Oakland, Oscoda, Presque Isle, Saginaw, Sanilac, Shiawassee, St. Clair, Tuscola, Washtenaw, and Wayne counties). Two more counties were open in 2016 than 2015. The late antlerless firearm season occurred from December 19, 2016, through January 1, 2017. Hunters pursuing deer during this season had to have purchased an antlerless or mentored youth license, possess an unused antlerless harvest tag (including DMA permits), and were limited to hunting on private land. All counties open during the early antlerless firearm season were also open for the late antlerless firearm season, as well as 17 additional counties: Allegan, Barry, Berrien, Branch, Calhoun, Cass, Gratiot, Kalamazoo, Kent, Mecosta, Montmorency, Muskegon, Newaygo, Oceana, Ottawa, St. Joseph, and Van Buren. Crossbows were legal to use during all archery and firearm seasons statewide, except in the UP, where crossbow use was prohibited during the late archery and muzzleloader seasons, unless the hunter was disabled.
METHODS The Wildlife Division provided all hunters the option to report information about their deer hunting activity voluntarily via the internet. This option was advertised through the hunting regulation booklet (digest) and on the DNR website, and an email message was sent to all license buyers that had provided an email address to the DNR (141,552). Hunters reported whether they hunted, the days spent afield, and whether they harvested a deer. Deer hunters were also asked their opinions about hunting deer with bait, the opening date of the regular firearm season, and antler point restrictions. Following the 2016 deer hunting seasons, a questionnaire was sent to 60,622 randomly selected individuals who had purchased a hunting license (deer, antlerless, mentored youth, or combination deer hunting licenses) and had not already voluntarily reported harvest information via the internet. Hunters receiving the questionnaire were asked the same questions as asked via the internet. Hunters were instructed not to report hunting effort and harvest associated with DMA permits because landowners obtaining these permits already were required to report the number of deer harvested to the DNR. Estimates were based primarily on information collected from random samples of hunting license buyers. Thus, these estimates were subject to sampling errors (Cochran 1977).
6
Estimates were calculated using a stratified random sampling design (Cochran 1977) and were presented along with their 95% confidence limit (CL). In theory, this CL can be added and subtracted from the estimate to calculate the 95% confidence interval. The confidence interval is a measure of the precision associated with the estimate and implies the true value would be within this interval 95 times out of 100. Unfortunately, there are several other possible sources of error in surveys that are probably more serious than theoretical calculations of sampling error. They include failure of participants to provide answers (nonresponse bias), question wording, and question order. It is very difficult to measure these biases. License buyers were assigned to one of five groups (strata) based on the type of license purchased and season that it was valid. The first stratum consisted of people eligible only for the archery, regular firearm, and muzzleloader hunting seasons (N = 400,027). The second stratum consisted of people eligible to hunt during archery, regular firearm, muzzleloader, early antlerless, and late antlerless seasons (N = 175,713). The third stratum consisted of people eligible to hunt during archery, regular firearm, muzzleloader, late antlerless, and Liberty seasons (N = 45,138). The fourth stratum consisted of 7,612 people that were eligible to participate in the special disabled hunts. Beginning in 2013, disabled veterans could obtain a free deer hunting license (i.e., Disabled Veteran license type). A unique type of hunting license was not available for non-veteran hunters with disabilities; however, disabled hunters younger than 65 years were sold a discounted hunting license (i.e., sold a senior hunting license). The fifth stratum consisted of 5,531 people that had voluntarily reported information about their hunting activity via the Internet before the random sample was selected. The random sample consisted of 29,416 people from the first stratum; 12,613 from the second stratum; 11,267 from the third stratum; and 7,326 from the fourth stratum. The stratified sampling design accounted for the varying probabilities of being selected from the strata so estimates could be reliably extrapolated from the sample to all license buyers. Estimates were calculated separately by the area where the hunt occurred. For consistency with previous surveys, the state was divided into eight areas that closely matched the DNR’s previous wildlife management administrative units (Figure 1). The state was also divided into three ecological regions (UP, Northern LP, and Southern LP). These regions generally matched major ecoregions (Albert 1995), except in the UP where two ecoregions were combined. Ecoregions are regions having similar soils, vegetation, climate, geology, and physiography. Estimates were also calculated for each DMU (Figure 2, Appendix B). Deer harvested from unknown locations were allocated among areas in proportion to the known harvest. Statistical tests are used routinely to determine the likelihood that the differences among estimates are larger than expected by chance alone. The overlap of 95% confidence intervals was used to determine whether estimates differed. Non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals were equivalent to stating that the difference between the means was larger than would be expected 995 out of 1,000 times, if the study had been repeated (Payton et al. 2003). Questionnaires were initially mailed during mid-January 2017, and two follow-up questionnaires were mailed to nonrespondents. To increase the number of questionnaires
7
returned, respondents that returned their questionnaire promptly became eligible to win a firearm or bow. Although 60,622 people were sent the questionnaire, 1,368 surveys were undeliverable resulting in an adjusted sample size of 59,254. Questionnaires were returned by 29,693 people (50% response rate). Estimates of harvest, hunting effort, and hunter participation are affected by the willingness of people to complete and return their questionnaires. This problem can confound comparisons of estimates made between years if response rates vary greatly. The percentage of people returning their questionnaire this year was lower than previous years. To reduce bias caused by this lower response rate, an adjustment was made on the 2016 estimates to make them comparable to the adjusted 2015 estimates (adjusted to a 74% response rate). Estimates of harvest, hunting effort, and hunter numbers were reduced by 6.5%, 4.8%, and 1.9%, respectively, to make estimates comparable to 2015. These reductions reflected the average decline noted between estimates calculated when 50% and 74% of the responses were used in 2000 and 2001 surveys.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In 2016, 634,021 people purchased a license to hunt deer in Michigan. The number of people buying a license in 2016 decreased by 3.1% from 2015 (654,579 people purchased a license in 2015). Most of the people buying a license were male (89%), and the average age of license buyers was 43 years (Figure 3). About 11% (68,300) of the license buyers were younger than 17 years old. About 4% (22,456) of the license buyers were younger than 12 years old. The number of people buying a license in 2016 was about 14% less than the number of people who purchased a license ten years ago in 2006 (734,307 people purchased a license in 2006). There were fewer license buyers for all age classes between 12 and 53 years of age in 2016, compared to 2006 (Figure 4). However, there were increased hunter numbers among the youngest and oldest age classes in 2016. The increased hunter numbers in the oldest age classes likely represented the rising share of older people in the population as the baby-boom generation aged and life expectancies have increased. In addition, legalization of crossbow use during the archery season probably increased participation among hunters in the oldest age classes. The increased participation among the youngest hunters likely reflected the lowering of the minimum age requirements. In 2012, the minimum age requirement was eliminated to hunt deer with a firearm, while hunters had to be at least 12 years old to participate in 2006. The number of 2016 deer harvest tags sold for all license types combined decreased by 2.3% from 2015 (Table 2). License buyers were issued an average of 2.1 harvest tags. About 93% of the license buyers obtained three or fewer harvest tags, and about 99% had five or fewer harvest tags (Figure 5). Hunters most frequently obtained antlerless and combination harvest tags (Figure 6). About 40% of the license buyers purchased at least one antlerless license (252,014 people), and greater than 98% of antlerless license buyers purchased three or fewer antlerless licenses, public and private licenses combined (Figure 7).
8
The antlerless license quota on private lands increased slightly from 435,400 in 2015 to 436,400 licenses in 2016 (Appendix A). The quota for public land antlerless licenses decreased slightly, declining from 58,700 to 58,000 between 2015 and 2016. Overall, the antlerless license quota for private and public lands combined was nearly unchanged, but the number of antlerless licenses sold declined by about 4% in 2016 (Table 2). About 92.4 ± 0.3% (585,994 hunters) of the people buying a license in 2016 actually spent time hunting deer (Table 3). Statewide, the number of people hunting deer during all seasons combined declined significantly by 4% from 2015. Most hunters (504,287) pursued deer during the regular firearm season (Figure 8). Significantly fewer people hunted during the regular firearm (-7%), muzzleloader (-7%), and early antlerless (-16%) seasons during 2016 (Table 3). The numbers of people hunting in the archery, late antlerless, Liberty and Independence seasons were not significantly different between 2015 and 2016 (Figure 9). About 50% of the days hunters spent pursuing deer throughout the state occurred in the archery season (Figure 10). About 38% of the hunting effort occurred during the regular firearm season. Nearly 12% of the hunting effort occurred in the muzzleloader and late antlerless seasons combined. Statewide, hunters devoted an average of 14.8 days afield hunting deer during all seasons combined (Table 4). Archers had the greatest number of days available to hunt deer (77 days) and devoted the greatest number of days afield (x̄ = 13.4 days/hunter) (Figure 11, Table 4). Statewide, the number of days hunting deer during all seasons combined declined significantly by 6% from 2015. Significantly fewer days were devoted to hunting during the regular firearm (-8%), muzzleloader (-10%), and early antlerless (-17%) seasons during 2016 (Table 3). About 347,219 deer were harvested statewide in 2016, which was not significantly different than in 2015 (Figures 12-13, Tables 5-6). Although statewide harvest was similar between years, harvest in the NLP increased significantly by 10% in 2016. Statewide harvest of antlerless and antlered deer in 2016 for all seasons combined was not significantly different from 2015. However, harvest of antlerless deer increased by 12% in the NLP and harvest of antlered deer increased by 17% and 9% in the UP and NLP, respectively (Table 5). Between 2015 and 2016, harvest of antlered deer increased significantly during the archery (10%) and muzzleloader (38%) seasons, but decreased in the Liberty (-20%) season. Statewide harvest of antlerless deer increased significantly in the archery (18%) and late antlerless (47%) seasons but declined by 11% in the regular firearm season. About 48% of the deer harvested (sexes combined) in 2016 were taken during the regular firearm season (Figure 14). Nearly 40% of the antlerless deer and 55% of the antlered bucks were harvested in the regular firearm season. Hunters took 37% of the harvested deer (sexes combined) during archery season. These archers took 35% of the antlerless deer and 38% of the antlered bucks harvested. Few antlered bucks (5%) were taken in the muzzleloader season. The early and late antlerless and muzzleloader seasons combined accounted for about 14% of the antlerless deer harvested.
9
About 87% of the animals harvested (sexes combined) in 2016 were taken on private lands (Table 7). Statewide, most of the antlerless deer (89%) and antlered bucks (85%) were harvested on private lands. Statewide, 44% of deer hunters harvested at least one deer (all deer seasons and sexes combined) in 2016 (Figure 15, Table 8), compared to the 41% successful in 2015. About 20% of hunters took an antlerless deer, and 31% took an antlered buck in 2015. About 13% of deer hunters harvested two or more deer. Hunters were most successful in taking a deer during the archery (33%), Liberty (31%), and regular firearm (30%) seasons (Figure 16, Table 9). Hunter success was lowest in the muzzleloader (15%) season. Nearly 21% of hunters took an antlered buck and 11% harvested an antlerless deer during the regular firearm season. Deer hunters were asked to report how satisfied they were with (1) number of deer seen, (2) number of antlered deer [bucks] seen, (3) size of antlers seen, (4) number of deer taken, and (5) their overall hunting experience. Statewide, <48% of hunters were satisfied with numbers of deer seen, bucks seen, size of antlers seen, deer taken, and their overall hunting experience in 2016 (Tables 10-12). Statewide levels of satisfaction increased significantly for all measures except number of deer harvested between 2015 and 2016. People hunting deer only on private lands were generally more satisfied than people hunting only on public lands (Tables 13-15). Most hunters (71%) approved or strongly approved of people hunting deer with bait; however, 19% of the hunters disapproved or strongly disapproved of baiting (Table 16). Highest rates of approval were among hunters in the Upper Peninsula. Approval of baiting in Michigan has increased since the 1980s (Table 17). Although most hunters approve of hunting deer with bait in 2016, most hunters also support restrictions on baiting to protect the health of the deer herd (Table 18), which was similar to opinions reported in 1999 (Frawley 2000). Deer hunters were presented three management options designed to reduce harvest of antlered deer and asked whether they supported these options in the region where they most often hunted (Table 19). Statewide, most deer hunters (59%) supported regional antler-point restrictions. In addition, most hunters (56%) supported allowing hunters to take two bucks in any combination of seasons if one of those bucks has at least four antler points on one antler. Michigan deer hunters have been periodically asked whether they supported buck harvest restrictions (e.g., Frawley and Rudolph 2014). Support for a statewide APR (i.e., 4 points) on the second harvested buck declined since first reported in 2006, while support for regional APRs on a second harvested buck increased between 2012 and 2016 (Table 20). A plurality of Michigan deer hunters statewide in all years except in 2001 did not support restricting hunters to a taking one buck per year (Table 20). Statewide, most deer hunters (85%) supported maintaining the November 15 opening date for the regular firearm season (Table 21). In contrast, only 10% of deer hunters opposed maintaining this date. About 36% of deer hunters statewide supported opening the regular
10
firearm season on the Saturday nearest to November 15 each year; while 56% opposed opening on this Saturday. Moreover, 19% of deer hunters statewide supported opening the regular firearm season on the Saturday before Thanksgiving each year; while 72% were opposed to opening the season on this Saturday. Since 1925, the firearm deer hunting season in Michigan has usually begun on November 15. The only exceptions were during 1962-1967, when the seasons were altered so they began on a Saturday in mid-November (Ryel 1983). There have been periodic suggestions for making a Saturday opening day, although assessments have shown the traditional November 15 opening date has consistently been the preferred choice (Frawley and Rudolph 2008), including results of this survey (Table 22). About 193,137 hunters used a crossbow during the archery season, and they harvested about 74,130 deer with the crossbow (Tables 23-25). The number of archers using a crossbow increased significantly by 4% from 2015 (185,632 archers in 2015). Harvest of deer by archers using a crossbow increased significantly by 12% from last year (65,988 deer taken in 2015). About 34% of these archers using a crossbow in 2016 harvested a deer with a crossbow in the archery season. An estimated 125,694 ± 3,030 hunters took 150,684 ± 4,234 deer to a commercial meat processor in 2016. Thus, about 46% of the deer harvested in all seasons (150,684 of 328,681 deer) went through a processor. This proportion is similar to the proportion of antlered deer taken to a processor in Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania Game Commission 2012, 2015).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank all the deer hunters that provided information. Theresa Riebow, Sarah Scienski, and Melissa Willis completed data entry. The figure of DMUs was prepared by Marshall Strong. Ashley Autenrieth, Steve Chadwick, Russ Mason, and Chad Stewart reviewed a previous version of this report.
LITERATURE CITED Albert, D. A. 1995. Regional landscape ecosystems of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin:
a working map and classification. General Technical Report NC-178. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experimental Station, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Cochran, W. G. 1977. Sampling techniques. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA. Frawley, B. J. 2000. 1999 Michigan deer hunter survey: deer baiting. Wildlife Division Report
3315. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, USA.
11
Frawley, B. J. and B. A. Rudolph. 2008. 2006 deer hunter opinion survey. Wildlife Division Report 3482. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, USA.
Frawley, B. J. and B. A. Rudolph. 2014. 2012 deer hunter opinion survey. Wildlife Division
Report 3580. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, USA. Payton, M. E., M. H. Greenstone, and N. Schenker. 2003. Overlapping confidence intervals
or standard error intervals: what do they mean in terms of statistical significance? Journal of Insect Science 3:34.
Pennsylvania Game Commission. 2012. 2011 Pennsylvania deer hunter survey preliminary
statewide results. Unpublished report. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA. Pennsylvania Game Commission. 2015. 2014 Pennsylvania deer hunter survey statewide
results. Unpublished report. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA. Peyton, R. B. and P. Bull. 2001. An assessment of possible antler restrictions and quality
deer management by Michigan deer hunters. Project report submitted to Wildlife Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Act Pittman-Robertson Project Number W-127-R.
Ryel, L. A. 1983. Deer hunters’ opinion survey, 1982. Wildlife Division Report 2958. Michigan
Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, USA.
12
IRON
DELTA
LUCE
KENT
MARQUETTE ALGER CHIPPEWAGOGEBIC
HURONBAY
SANILAC
LAKE
BARAGA
IONIA
ONTONAGON
MACKINAC
OAKLAND
CASS
ALLEGAN
HOUGHTON
IOSCO
CLARE
TUSCOLA
MENOM-INEE
SAGINAW
ALCONA
LAPEER
EATONBARRY
NEWAY-GO
WAYNE
SCHOOL-CRAFT
LENAWEE
JACKSON
ALPENA
CALHOUN
INGHAM
DICKIN-SON
MASON
ANTRIM
GENESEE
EMMET
OTTAWA
OSCODA
CLINTON
BERRIEN
OCEANA
GRATIOTMONTCALM
CHE-BOYGAN
BRANCH
OTSEGO
ISABELLA
OGEMAW
MONROE
OSCEOLA
MIDLANDMECOSTA
HILLS-DALE
WEX-FORD
KAL-KASKA
MANISTEE
GLAD-WIN
MACOMB
WASH-TENAW
VAN BUREN
MISS-AUKEE
LIVING-STON
BENZIECRAW-FORD
ST.JOSEPH
PRESQUE ISLE
MUSKEGON
ARENAC
SHIA-WASSEE
LEE-LANAU
CHARLEVOIX
KEWEENAW
ST. CLAIR
KALAMA-ZOO
ROS-COMMON
MONT-MORENCY
GRAND TRAV-ERSE
Southern LPEcoregion
Western UP
Northern LPEcoregion
UPEcoregion
Eastern UP
North-eastern
LPNorth-
westernLP
South-eastern
LP
South-western
LPSouthcentral
LP
SaginawBay LP
Figure 1. Areas used to summarize deer harvest in Michigan for the 2016 hunting seasons.
13
Figure 2. Deer management units in Michigan for the 2016 hunting seasons.
14
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96
Hun
ters
(%)
Hunter's Age on Oct. 1, 2016
Figure 3. Age of people that purchased a deer hunting license in Michigan for the 2016 hunting seasons (mean = 43 years).
15
20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 5,00005
101520253035404550556065707580859095
100
License buyers (No.)
Hun
ter's
age
on
Oct
ober
12016 2006
Male Female
Figure 4. Number of deer hunting license buyers in Michigan by age and sex during 2006 and 2016 hunting seasons. Deer hunting licenses were purchased by 734,307 people in 2006 and 634,021 people in 2016.
16
05
101520253035404550
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+
Hun
ters
(%)
Number of Harvest Tags
Deer Tags18%
Combination Tags55%
Antlerless Tags26%
Mentored Youth Tags
1%
Figure 5. Number of harvest tags (all license and tag types) issued per person for hunting deer in Michigan during the 2016 hunting seasons (mean = 2.1 tags). Licenses were purchased by 634,021 people.
Figure 6. Types of harvest tags issued for deer hunting in Michigan during the 2016 hunting seasons.
17
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+
Hun
ters
(%)
Number of Antlerless Licenses
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
Arch
ery
Reg
ular
Fire
arm
Muz
zlel
oade
r
Early
Ant
lerle
ss
Late
Ant
lerle
ss
Libe
rty
Inde
pend
ence
Num
ber o
f dee
r hun
ters
Season
Figure 7. Percentage of deer hunting license buyers (all license types) purchasing an antlerless license in Michigan, 2016. Antlerless licenses were purchased by 252,014 of 634,021 people (40%) buying deer hunting licenses.
Figure 8. Number of people hunting deer in Michigan during the 2016 hunting seasons. Error bars represent the 95% CLs.
18
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
1953
1957
1961
1965
1969
1973
1977
1981
1985
1989
1993
1997
2001
2005
2009
2013
Num
ber o
f dee
r hun
ters
Year
Regular firearm Archery Muzzleloader
Archery50%
Regular Firearm
38%
Muzzleloader9%
Early Antlerless
0.24%Late Antlerless
3%Liberty0.41%
Independence0.04%
Figure 9. Number of people hunting deer in Michigan during the regular firearm, archery, and muzzleloader seasons, 1953-2016.
Figure 10. Distribution of hunting effort among deer hunting seasons in Michigan, 2016.
19
02468
10121416
Arch
ery
Reg
ular
Fire
arm
Muz
zlel
oade
r
Early
Ant
lerle
ss
Late
Ant
lerle
ss
Libe
rty
Inde
pend
ence
Mea
n H
untin
g Ef
fort
(Day
s)
Season
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
1963
1968
1973
1978
1983
1988
1993
1998
2003
2008
2013
Num
ber
of d
eer
harv
este
d
Year
Figure 11. Mean number of days per hunter spent hunting deer in Michigan during the 2016 hunting seasons. Error bars represent the 95% CLs.
Figure 12. Number of deer harvested in Michigan’s hunting seasons, 1963-2016. Harvest from all seasons and for all deer sexes was combined.
20
0
25,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
125,000
150,000
175,000
200,000
Regular Firearm
Muzzleloader
Late Antlerless
Archery
Antlerless
0
25,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
125,000
150,000
175,000
200,000
Harv
est
Regular Firearm
Muzzleloader
Archery
Antlered Bucks
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
1963
1968
1973
1978
1983
1988
1993
1998
2003
2008
2013
Year
Regular Firearm
Muzzleloader
Sexes Combined
Archery
Late Antlerless
Figure 13. Number of deer harvested in Michigan’s hunting seasons, 1963-2016. Harvests for early antlerless, youth, and special disabled hunter seasons were not shown.
21
Archery37%
Regular Firearm48%
Muzzleloader7%
Early Antlerless1%
Late Antlerless5%
Liberty1.9%
Independence0.1%
Sexes Combined
Archery38%
Regular Firearm55%
Muzzleloader5%
Youth2%
Independence0.1%
Antlered Bucks
Archery35%
Regular Firearm40%
Muzzleloader10%
Early Antlerless2%
Late Antlerless
12%Liberty1.5%
Independence0.1%
Antlerless
Figure 14. Distribution of harvest among deer hunting seasons in Michigan, 2016. Antlered deer had antlers at least 3 inches in length; antlerless deer included deer without antlers and deer with antlers less than 3 inches in length.
22
≥1 ≥2 ≥3 ≥4 ≥5
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
Hu
nte
rs (
%)
Deer Harvested
Both Sexes Antlerless Antlered Bucks
Figure 15. Percentage of hunters harvesting a deer in Michigan, 2016. Error bars represent the 95% CLs.
23
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%
Antlerless Deer
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%
Succ
essf
ul H
unte
rs
(%)
Antlered Bucks
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%
Arch
ery
Reg
ular
Fire
arm
Muz
zlel
oade
r
Early
Ant
lerle
ss
Late
Ant
lerle
ss
Libe
rty
Inde
pend
ence
Season
Sexes Combined
Figure 16. Percentage of hunters harvesting a deer in Michigan’s deer hunting seasons, 2016. Error bars represent the 95% CLs. Antlered deer had at least one antler at least 3 inches in length; antlerless deer included deer without antlers and deer with antlers less than 3 inches in length.
24
Table 1. Type of deer that could be taken during the 2016 Michigan deer hunting seasons for each combination of season and hunting license. Type of license (harvest tag) or permit Season
Type of deer that could be harvesteda and area
Deer license or deer combination regular license
Archery seasons Antlered deerb in the Upper Peninsula
Deer license or deer combination regular license
Archery seasons Antlerless or antlered deerb in Lower Peninsula
Deer license or deer combination regular license
Regular Firearm or Muzzleloader seasons
Antlered deer statewide or antlerless deer in DMUs 333 or 487
Deer license or deer combination regular license
Liberty and Independence seasons Antlerless or antlered deer statewide
Combination Licensed (Restricted harvest tag)
Archery seasons Deer that has at least 1 antler with 4 or more antler points, 1 or more inches in length, in the Upper Peninsula
Combination Licensed (Restricted harvest tag)
Archery seasons Antlerless deer or a deer that has at least 1 antler with 4 or more antler points, 1 or more inches in length, in the Lower Peninsula
Combination Licensed (Restricted harvest tag)
Regular Firearm or Muzzleloader seasons
A deer that has at least 1 antler with 4 or more antler points (1 or more inches in length) or an antlerless deer in DMUs 333 or 487
Combination Licensed (Restricted harvest tag)
Liberty and Independence seasonsc Antlerless or antlered deer statewide
aAntlered deer had antlers at least 3 inches in length; antlerless deer included deer without antlers and deer with antlers less than 3 inches in length. Hunters could harvest a maximum of 2 antlered deer per year (all seasons combined).
bIf a person took 2 antlered deer during all seasons combined (except Mentored Youth hunters), one of the antlered deer must have had at least 1 antler with 4 or more antler points, each point being 1 or more inches in length.
cYouth less than 14 years of age could hunt with archery and crossbow equipment on public or private lands or with a firearm on private or Commercial Forest lands only. Hunters could harvest only 1 deer in the Liberty and Independence seasons.
dCombination licenses included two harvest tags (i.e., regular and restricted harvest tags).
25
Table 1 (Continued). Type of deer that could be taken during the 2016 Michigan deer hunting seasons for each combination of season and hunting license. Type of license (harvest tag) or permit Season
Type of deer that could be harvesteda
Mentored youth deer license Archery , Regular Firearm, Muzzleloader, or Liberty seasonsc
Antlerless or antlered deer statewide
Mentored Youth Antlerless seasons Antlerless deer only Antlerless Licensee All seasons Antlerless deer only Deer Management Assistance (DMA) permitf
All seasons Antlerless deer only
Managed Deer Hunt permitg Specified season Antlerless deer only aAntlered deer had antlers at least 3 inches in length; antlerless deer included deer without antlers and deer with antlers less than 3 inches in length.
Hunters could harvest a maximum of 2 antlered deer per year (all seasons combined). bIf a person took 2 antlered deer during all seasons combined (except Mentored Youth hunters), one of the antlered deer must have had at least 1 antler
with 4 or more antler points, each point being 1 or more inches in length. cYouth less than 14 years of age could hunt with archery and crossbow equipment on public or private lands or with a firearm on private or Commercial
Forest lands only. Hunters could harvest only 1 deer in the Liberty and Independence seasons. dCombination licenses included two harvest tags (i.e., regular and restricted harvest tags). eAlthough antlerless licenses were only valid for taking an antlerless deer, a person with a valid antlerless deer hunting license that killed a male deer
with antlers less than 3 inches in length could choose to tag the male deer with any deer hunting license (deer or either combination license). fPermits issued to landowners in areas where the number of antlerless licenses was insufficient to meet the objective of specific landowners (i.e.,
controlling disease or the deer population). To use these permits, the hunter must also have purchased a valid deer hunting license for the season in which they were hunting.
gPermits for special hunts on designated public lands (e.g., some state parks, game areas, and federal property). These permits valid only during specific dates, which varied among areas. Permits issued to applicants using a lottery (i.e., random selection). To use these permits, the hunter must also have purchased a valid deer hunting license.
Subtotal 364,277 357,508 343,911 -3.8 Mentored Youth Licenses 12,959 11,935 11,399 -4.5 Total Licenses Sold 1,001,091 987,089 955,598 -3.2 aCombination licenses included two harvest tags. Other license types had one harvest tag.
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005. cNumber of hunters does not add up to statewide total because hunters can hunt in more than one area.
29
Table 3 (continued). Number of deer hunters and hunting effort in Michigan by hunting season, 2015-2016.
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005. cNumber of hunters does not add up to statewide total because hunters can hunt in more than one area.
30
Table 3 (continued). Number of deer hunters and hunting effort in Michigan by hunting season, 2015-2016.
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005. cNumber of hunters does not add up to statewide total because hunters can hunt in more than one area. dEstimates included results of both youth and disabled hunters.
31
Table 3 (continued). Number of deer hunters and hunting effort in Michigan by hunting season, 2015-2016.
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005. cNumber of hunters does not add up to statewide total because hunters can hunt in more than one area.
32
Table 4. Mean number of days hunters spent hunting deer (x̄ hunting effort) in Michigan by hunting season, 2016.a
Area
Season Archery Regular Firearm Muzzleloader Early Antlerless
x̄ days 95% CLb x̄ days 95% CLb x̄ days 95% CLb x̄ days 95% CLb
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season. b95% confidence limit. Table 4 (Continued). Mean number of days hunters spent hunting deer (x̄ hunting effort) in Michigan by hunting season, 2016.a
Area
Season Late Antlerless Liberty Independence All Seasons x̄ days 95% CLb x̄ days 95% CLb x̄ days 95% CLb x̄ days 95% CLb
Special permitsc Antlerless 6,673 5,931 6,934 16.9 Grand Total Antlerless 150,812 143,004 151,988 6.3 Antlered bucks 178,228 191,608 196,233 2.4 Sexes combined 329,040 334,612 348,222 4.1 aEstimates for Liberty hunt included results of both youth and disabled hunters. bEstimates included only one disabled hunter season. cIncludes deer harvested with DMA permits. These permits could be used during any deer hunting season. *P<0.005.
34
Table 6. Number of deer harvested in Michigan by hunting season, 2015-2016.a
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005.
35
Table 6 (continued). Number of deer harvested in Michigan by hunting season, 2015-2016.a
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005.
36
Table 6 (continued). Number of deer harvested in Michigan by hunting season, 2015-2016.a
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005. cEstimates included results of both youth and disabled hunters.
37
Table 6 (continued). Number of deer harvested in Michigan by hunting season, 2015-2016.a
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005.
38
Table 7. Number of deer harvested on public and private lands during all seasons combined in Michigan by management region, 2015-2016.a
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. b95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005.
39
Table 8. Percentage of deer hunters harvesting deer in Michigan during all seasons, 2016.a
Sex and Area
Number of deer harvested ≥1 deer ≥2 deer ≥3 deer ≥4 deer ≥5 deer
Antlered bucksc West UP 26.8 1.7 1.0 0.4 East UP 21.7 2.9 0.7 0.6 NE LP 26.4 1.3 2.6 0.5 NW LP 26.0 1.2 3.6 0.5 Sag. Bay 33.7 1.4 5.1 0.7 SW LP 28.4 1.5 4.2 0.7 SC LP 29.7 1.4 4.2 0.6 SE LP 23.8 1.8 3.5 0.8 UP 25.7 1.5 1.0 0.3 NLP 27.1 0.8 3.4 0.3 SLP 30.7 0.8 4.5 0.4 Statewided 30.9 0.6 4.3 0.3
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season and deer taken with DMA permits. b95% confidence limit. cThe season bag limit for antlered deer was two. dThe statewide estimate was derived from all hunters, including hunters that had failed to report where they hunted. In contrast, regional estimates were derived from only hunters that had reported hunting in the area.
40
Table 8 (continued). Percentage of deer hunters harvesting deer in Michigan during all seasons, 2016.a
Sex and Area
Number of deer harvested ≥1 deer ≥2 deer ≥3 deer ≥4 deer ≥5 deer
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season and deer taken with DMA permits. b95% confidence limit. cThe season bag limit for antlered deer was two. dThe statewide estimate was derived from all hunters, including hunters that had failed to report where they hunted. In contrast, regional estimates were derived from only hunters that had reported hunting in the area.
41
Table 9. Percentage of deer hunters harvesting at least one deer in Michigan by hunting season, 2016.a
Sex and Area
Season Archery Regular Firearm Muzzleloader Early Antlerless Late Antlerless Liberty
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season and deer taken with DMA permits. b95% confidence limit.
43
Table 9 (Continued). Percentage of deer hunters harvesting at least one deer in Michigan by hunting season, 2016.a
Sex and Area
Season Independence All Seasons
Success 95% CLb Success 95% CLb Antlerless
West UP 13.1 7.3 3.7 0.7 East UP 3.2 5.1 0.1 0.1 NE LP 7.9 7.1 16.7 1.1 NW LP 4.2 4.5 18.2 1.0 Sag. Bay 11.5 15.0 25.5 1.3 SW LP 16.2 19.2 21.8 1.3 SC LP 3.8 2.3 22.8 1.2 SE LP 2.0 2.8 17.7 1.6 UP 9.1 5.6 2.9 0.6 NLP 9.2 6.9 18.6 0.7 SLP 6.2 5.7 23.0 0.7 Statewide 7.7 3.9 20.2 0.5
Antlered Bucks West UP 10.9 6.7 26.8 1.7 East UP 6.5 8.2 21.7 2.9 NE LP 7.2 7.1 26.4 1.3 NW LP 18.3 8.8 26.0 1.2 Sag. Bay 12.2 7.2 33.7 1.4 SW LP 17.4 13.0 28.4 1.5 SC LP 19.8 14.6 29.7 1.4 SE LP 16.4 17.1 23.8 1.8 UP 9.1 5.6 25.7 1.5 NLP 13.3 5.4 27.1 0.8 SLP 17.5 7.5 30.7 0.8 Statewide 14.3 4.2 30.9 0.6
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season and deer taken with DMA permits. b95% confidence limit.
44
Table 9 (continued). Percentage of deer hunters harvesting at least one deer in Michigan by hunting season, 2016.a
Sex and Area
Season Independence All Seasons
Success 95% CLb Success 95% CLb Sexes combined
West UP 24.1 9.8 29.5 1.8 East UP 9.7 11.0 21.8 2.9 NE LP 15.1 9.9 38.9 1.4 NW LP 22.4 9.7 38.9 1.3 Sag. Bay 23.1 15.4 49.3 1.5 SW LP 33.6 19.8 42.4 1.6 SC LP 23.5 14.7 45.2 1.5 SE LP 18.4 17.0 37.3 2.1 UP 18.3 9.0 27.9 1.6 NLP 22.6 8.1 40.4 0.9 SLP 23.5 8.8 45.6 0.9 Statewide 21.9 5.4 44.0 0.6
aExcluded people that did not hunt during the season and deer taken with DMA permits. b95% confidence limit.
45
Table 10. Level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the number of deer seen and number of antlered deer (bucks) seen among Michigan deer hunters, 2015-2016.
aIncluded hunters who were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied.” bIncluded hunters who were “somewhat dissatisfied” or “strongly dissatisfied.” c95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005.
46
Table 11. Level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the size of the antlers on antlered deer (bucks) and overall deer hunting experience among Michigan deer hunters, 2015-2016.
Criteria and area
Satisfied hunters (%)a Dissatisfied hunters (%)b
2015 2016 95% CLc
Difference from 2015 to
2016 (%) 2015 2016 95% CLc
Difference from 2015 to
2016 (%) Size of antlers
West UP NA 14 1 NA 61 2 East UP NA 12 3 NA 61 4 NE LP NA 24 1 NA 45 2 NW LP NA 27 1 NA 44 1 Sag. Bay NA 25 1 NA 47 2 SW LP NA 24 2 NA 47 2 SC LP NA 26 1 NA 45 2 SE LP NA 23 2 NA 47 2 UP NA 14 1 NA 61 2 NLP NA 25 1 NA 45 1 SLP NA 25 1 NA 46 1 Statewide NA 24 1 NA 48 1
aIncluded hunters who were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied.” bIncluded hunters who were “somewhat dissatisfied” or “strongly dissatisfied.” c95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005.
47
Table 12. Level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with overall deer hunting experience and number of deer harvested among Michigan deer hunters, 2015-2016.
aIncluded hunters who were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied.” bIncluded hunters who were “somewhat dissatisfied” or “strongly dissatisfied.” c95% confidence limit for the 2016 estimate. *P<0.005.
48
Table 13. Level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the number of deer seen and number of antlered deer (bucks) seen among Michigan deer hunters in 2016. Estimates provided separately for hunters hunting on private land only and public land only within the hunter’s preferred hunt area.
aIncluded hunters who were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied.” bIncluded hunters who were “somewhat dissatisfied” or “strongly dissatisfied.” *P<0.005.
49
Table 14. Level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the size of antlers on antlered deer (bucks) and overall deer hunting experience among Michigan deer hunters in 2016. Estimates provided separately for hunters hunting on private land only and public land only within the hunter’s preferred hunt area.
aIncluded hunters who were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied.” bIncluded hunters who were “somewhat dissatisfied” or “strongly dissatisfied.” *P<0.005.
50
Table 15. Level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the number of deer harvested among Michigan deer hunters in 2016. Estimates provided separately for hunters hunting on private land only and public land only within the hunter’s preferred hunt area.
aIncluded hunters who were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied.” bIncluded hunters who were “somewhat dissatisfied” or “strongly dissatisfied.” *P<0.005.
51
Table 16. Proportion of deer hunters statewide approving or disapproving of other people hunting deer with the aid of bait in Michigan, 2016.
Table 17. Comparison of the proportion of deer hunters statewide approving or disapproving of other people hunting deer with the aid of bait in Michigan in 1987, 1992, 1999, and 2016.
Yearc Approvea Disapproveb Not sure
% 95% CL % 95% CL % 95% CL 1987 38 NAd 26 NA 36 NA 1992 55 NA 28 NA 17 NA 1999 61 1 28 1 10 1 2016 71 1 19 <1 10 <1
aIncluded “strongly approve” and “approve” responses. bIncluded “strongly disapprove” and “disapprove” responses. c1987 and 1992 estimates from unpublished DNR data’ 1999 estimates from Frawley (2000); 2016 estimates from current survey.
dNot available.
52
Table 18. Proportion of deer hunters agreeing or disagreeing with various statements about regulating bait to hunt deer in their preferred county of hunt in Michigan, 2016.
Statement and region
Level of support Strongly agree or
agree Disagree or strongly
disagree Not sure % 95% CL % 95% CL % 95% CL
Baiting should never be restricted. UP 52 2 42 2 7 1 NLP 46 1 47 1 8 1 SLP 42 1 48 1 9 1 Statewide 45 1 47 1 8 <1
Table 19. Proportion of deer hunters supporting or opposing various buck harvest restrictions in Michigan, 2016.
Statement and region
Level of support Strongly support or
support Oppose or strongly
oppose Not sure % 95% CL % 95% CL % 95% CL
Allow hunters to take a total of two bucks in any combination of seasons if one of those bucks has at least 4 antler points on one side. No antler point restrictions on other buck.
Allow hunters to take a total of two bucks in any combination of seasons, but require the following regional minimum antler point restrictions. These restrictions are meant to protect over 50% of yearling bucks to promote their growth to older age classes.
• Upper Peninsula one buck 2 or more points on one side, the other 4 or more points on one side
• Northern Lower Peninsula one buck 3 or more points on one side, the other 4 or more points on one side
• Southern Lower Peninsula both bucks 4 or more points on one side UP 56 2 39 2 5 1 NLP 62 1 29 1 9 1 SLP 57 1 32 1 11 1 Statewide 59 1 32 1 10 <1
Allow only one antlered buck (no antler restrictions) per hunter per year. UP 55 2 37 2 8 1 NLP 40 1 52 1 8 1 SLP 43 1 48 1 9 1 Statewide 43 1 48 1 9 <1
54
Table 20. Comparison of the proportion of deer hunters supporting or opposing various buck harvest restrictions in Michigan in 1993, 2001, 2006, 2012, and 2016.
Option Yearc
Supporta Opposeb Not sure
% 95% CL %
95% CL %
95% CL
Allow two bucks in all seasons combined if one of the bucks has at least 4 antler points on one side.
Allow regional APRs when taking two bucks: (UP: 2 and 4 Points, NLP: 3 and 4 Points, SLP: 4 Points)
2012 46 2 45 2 9 1 2016 59 1 32 1 10 <1
Allow only one antlered buck (no APRs) per hunter per year.
1993 44 NAd 49 NA 8 NA 2001 58 NA 31 NA 9 NA 2006 35 2 58 2 6 1 2012 37 2 57 2 6 1 2016 43 1 48 1 9 <1
aIncluded “strongly supported” and “supported” responses. bIncluded “strongly opposed” and “opposed” responses. c1993 (unpulished DNR data), 2001 (Peyton and Bull 2001), 2006 (Frawley and Rudolph 2008), 2012 (Frawley and Rudolph 2014), 2016 estimates from current survey.
dNot available.
55
Table 21. Proportion of deer hunters supporting or opposing various options regarding the opening date of the regular firearm season in Michigan, 2016.
Statement and region
Level of support Strongly support or
support Oppose or strongly
oppose Not sure % 95% CL % 95% CL % 95% CL
Change the opening date of the regular firearm season if it would increase hunter participation.
Open on the Saturday nearest November 15 each year. UP 32 2 61 2 7 1 NLP 36 1 57 1 7 1 SLP 38 1 54 1 8 1 Statewide 36 1 56 1 8 <1
Open on the Saturday prior to Thanksgiving each year. UP 12 1 81 2 7 1 NLP 18 1 74 1 9 1 SLP 22 1 68 1 10 1 Statewide 19 1 72 1 9 <1
56
Table 22. Comparison of the proportion of deer hunters statewide supporting or opposing various options regarding the opening date of the regular firearm season in Michigan in 2006, 2009, and 2016.
Option Yearc
Supporta Opposeb Not sure
% 95% CL %
95% CL %
95% CL
Change opening date if it would increase hunter participation 2016 31 1 58 1 11 <1 Maintain November 15 opening 2006 84 1 12 1 4 1 2009 84 <1 10 <1 6 <1 2016 85 <1 10 <1 6 <1 Open Saturday nearest November 15 2006 39 2 54 2 7 1 2009 42 1 49 1 10 <1 2016 36 1 56 1 8 <1 Open Saturday before Thanksgiving 2009 20 <1 69 1 11 <1 2016 19 <1 72 1 9 <1 aIncluded “strongly supported” and “supported” responses. bIncluded “strongly opposed” and “opposed” responses. c2006 estimates from Frawley and Rudolph (2008); 2009 estimates from Frawley (2010); 2016 estimates from current survey.
57
Table 23. Estimated proportion and number of archers that used a crossbow during 2016 archery season in Michigan, summarized by region.
Region Archers using a crossbow during archery season
% 95% CL Total 95% CL UP 56.7 3.3 12,259 1,059 NLP 65.2 1.4 74,484 2,452 SLP 57.2 1.2 91,229 2,640 Unknowna 56.2 2.9 15,164 1,168 Statewide 59.9 0.8 193,137 3,496 aRegion could not be determined when hunter did not report where they hunted or when hunter reported hunting in more than one region.
Table 24. Estimated hunter success of archers hunting with a crossbow during 2016 archery season in Michigan, summarized by type of deer and region.
Region Antlerless Antlered Bucks Sexes Combined
%a 95% CL %a 95% CL %a 95% CL UP 3.5 1.6 14.3 3.0 17.1 3.3 NLP 16.3 1.3 20.6 1.4 34.1 1.7 SLP 13.9 1.1 25.2 1.4 35.7 1.5 Unknownb 17.4 3.0 19.0 3.1 32.4 3.7 Statewide 14.5 0.8 22.2 0.9 33.6 1.0 aPercentage of crossbow hunters harvesting at least one deer. bRegion could not be determined when hunter did not report where they hunted or when hunter reported hunting in more than one region.
Table 25. Estimated number of deer harvested by archers with a crossbow during 2016 archery season in Michigan, summarized by type of deer and region.
Region Antlerless Antlered Bucks Sexes Combined
No. 95% CL No. 95% CL No. 95% CL UP 411 190 1,699 392 2,111 451 NLP 12,949 1,169 15,734 1,250 28,683 1,816 SLP 13,949 1,258 23,598 1,520 37,547 2,120 Unknowna 2,834 562 2,955 552 5,789 867 Statewide 30,143 1,795 43,986 2,041 74,130 2,877 aRegion could not be determined when hunter did not report where they hunted or when hunter reported hunting in more than one region.
58
Appendix A. Antlerless deer hunting license quotas, number of antlerless licenses sold, and number of hunters purchasing an antlerless license in Michigan during 2016, summarized by Deer Management Unit and license type (public and private lands).
DMUa DMU name
Public land Private land License quota
Licenses soldb
License buyersb
License quota
Licenses soldb
License buyersb
001 Alcona Countyc 5,000 2,126 1,817 0 0 0 003 Allegan County 200 196 196 5,000 4,944 4,045 004 Alpena Countyc 2,000 449 385 0 0 0 005 Antrim County 200 164 164 5,200 4,280 3,369 006 Arenac County 500 401 401 7,000 3,543 2,871 007 Big Bay Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 008 Barry County 1,000 860 752 7,500 5,108 4,368 009 Bay County 200 176 148 3,000 2,156 1,793 010 Benzie County 100 113 113 1,000 891 890 013 Calhoun County 100 92 82 7,500 6,042 4,960 015 Charlevoix County 200 174 174 3,600 3,213 2,472 016 Cheboygan County 100 108 108 100 120 120 017 Sault Ste. Marie Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 018 Clare County 900 729 726 8,000 7,300 5,735 020 Crawford County 700 657 657 900 763 762 021 Manistique Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 022 Crystal Falls Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 024 Emmet County 200 177 176 800 714 714 025 Genesee County 0 0 0 8,500 4,581 3,979 026 Gladwin County 1,200 992 992 8,000 6,173 4,889 027 Watersmeet Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 028 Grand Traverse County 100 117 117 1,200 1,067 1,067 029 Gratiot County 1,300 1,181 942 9,000 4,702 3,630 030 Hillsdale County 400 357 282 12,000 6,676 5,432 031 Nisula Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 035 Iosco Countyc 700 583 583 0 0 0 036 Amasa/Michigamme Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 037 Isabella County 100 81 74 11,000 6,947 5,439 038 Jackson County 1,600 1,464 1,317 17,000 8,178 6,718
aSee Figure 2 for the locations of DMUs. bNumber of license buyers does not add up to statewide total because hunters could purchase licenses in more than one DMU. Number of licenses sold could exceed the quota because junior licenses sold don’t count against the quota.
cAlso part of DMU 487. dSpecial deer hunts on public land. Licenses for these DMUs were available on a local basis.
59
Appendix A (continued). Antlerless deer hunting license quotas, number of antlerless licenses sold, and number of hunters purchasing an antlerless license in Michigan during 2016, summarized by Deer Management Unit and license type (public and private lands).
DMUa DMU name
Public land Private land License quota
Licenses soldb
License buyersb
License quota
Licenses soldb
License buyersb
040 Kalkaska County 100 121 121 400 369 369 042 Keweenaw Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 043 Lake County 100 157 157 2,900 2,483 2,480 044 Lapeer County 2,000 1,271 1,150 15,000 7,755 6,369 045 Leelanau County 100 94 94 1,400 1,259 1,047 046 Lenawee County 400 353 299 9,000 5,039 4,262 047 Livingston County 2,000 1,517 1,372 15,000 5,247 4,430 048 Newberry Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 050 Macomb County 200 183 168 4,000 2,222 1,929 051 Manistee County 100 128 127 3,000 2,621 2,616 053 Mason County 100 132 132 4,900 4,401 3,594 055 Menominee Unit 0 0 0 5,000 4,837 3,752 056 Midland County 1,500 1,308 1,135 7,500 4,807 3,955 057 Missaukee County 400 370 370 3,200 2,881 2,441 058 Monroe County 100 69 69 1,000 880 849 060 Montmorency Countyc 5,000 3,601 2,986 0 0 0 063 Oakland County 2,500 2,298 2,031 7,000 3,413 2,899 065 Ogemaw County 700 583 583 6,000 5,780 4,624 066 Ontonagon County 0 0 0 0 0 0 067 Osceola County 300 262 261 5,600 5,087 4,066 068 Oscoda Countyc 5,000 4,342 3,616 0 0 0 069 Otsego County 100 107 107 100 120 120 071 Presque Isle Countyc 3,000 1,803 1,499 0 0 0 072 Roscommon County 400 381 381 1,000 877 802 073 Saginaw County 200 160 160 6,500 6,069 4,795 074 St. Clair County 700 609 554 9,500 6,733 5,643 081 Washtenaw County 1,500 1,363 1,223 15,000 4,760 3,984 082 Wayne County 100 66 65 1,200 889 784 083 Wexford County 1,000 896 896 3,700 3,418 2,733
aSee Figure 2 for the locations of DMUs. bNumber of license buyers does not add up to statewide total because hunters could purchase licenses in more than one DMU. Number of licenses sold could exceed the quota because junior licenses sold don’t count against the quota.
cAlso part of DMU 487. dSpecial deer hunts on public land. Licenses for these DMUs were available on a local basis.
60
Appendix A (continued). Antlerless deer hunting license quotas, number of antlerless licenses sold, and number of hunters purchasing an antlerless license in Michigan during 2016, summarized by Deer Management Unit and license type (public and private lands).
DMUa DMU name
Public land Private land License quota
Licenses soldb
License buyersb
License quota
Licenses soldb
License buyersb
115 Beaver Island 200 106 92 300 133 121 117 Drummond Island 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 Bay De Noc Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 Norway Unit 0 0 0 500 449 361 127 Ironwood Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 131 Twin Lakes Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 Tawas Unitc 100 91 80 0 0 0 145 North Manitou Islandd 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 Round/Bois Blanc Island 100 90 81 100 94 86 152 Gwinn Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 155 Gladstone Unit 0 0 0 1,500 1,422 1,178 174 St. Clair Flatsd 0 0 0 300 121 108 245 South Fox Islandd 0 0 0 0 0 0 249 Trout Lake Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 252 Rock Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 255 LaBranche Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 273 Shiawassee Unitd 0 0 0 0 0 0 311 Keeler Unit 700 625 533 10,000 9,911 7,736 312 Sherwood Unit 1,000 928 814 16,000 12,464 9,942 332 Greenleaf Unit 5,200 4,820 3,853 42,000 19,757 15,641 333 Core CWD Area Unlimited 895 776 Unlimited 4,397 3,686 341 Sparta Unit 1,000 861 764 17,500 13,301 11,253 349 Engadine Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 354 Lakeview Unit 1,200 1,039 944 26,000 16,074 12,609 361 Fremont Unit 100 195 195 8,000 7,313 7,285 419 CWD Management Zone 2,000 1,864 1,461 40,000 24,118 19,173 452 Core TB Areac 2,000 1,458 1,260 0 0 0 487 Northern Multi-County 0 0 0 30,000 18,629 14,707
NA Deer Management Assistance Permits NA NA NA NA 846 9,250
NA Managed Deer Hunt Permitsd NA 699 786 NA NA NA
aSee Figure 2 for the locations of DMUs. bNumber of license buyers does not add up to statewide total because hunters could purchase licenses in more than one DMU. Number of licenses sold could exceed the quota because junior licenses sold don’t count against the quota.
cAlso part of DMU 487. dSpecial deer hunts on public land. Licenses for these DMUs were available on a local basis.
61
Appendix B. Estimated number of deer hunters, hunting effort, and deer harvested in Michigan during 2016, summarized by Deer Management Unit.
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. bColumn totals for hunting effort and harvest may not equal regional and statewide totals because of rounding errors. cNumber of hunters does not add up to statewide total because hunters can hunt in more than one DMU. dSee Figure 2 for the locations of DMUs. e95% confidence limit. fEstimates for DMU 273 were combined with estimates for DMU 073.
62
Appendix B (continued). Estimated number of deer hunters, hunting effort, and deer harvested in Michigan during 2016, summarized by Deer Management Unit.
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. bColumn totals for hunting effort and harvest may not equal regional and statewide totals because of rounding errors. cNumber of hunters does not add up to statewide total because hunters can hunt in more than one DMU. dSee Figure 2 for the locations of DMUs. e95% confidence limit. fEstimates for DMU 273 were combined with estimates for DMU 073.
63
Appendix B (continued). Estimated number of deer hunters, hunting effort, and deer harvested in Michigan during 2016, summarized by Deer Management Unit.
aHarvest estimates do not include deer taken with DMA permits. An additional 6,934 deer were taken with these permits. bColumn totals for hunting effort and harvest may not equal regional and statewide totals because of rounding errors. cNumber of hunters does not add up to statewide total because hunters can hunt in more than one DMU. dSee Figure 2 for the locations of DMUs. e95% confidence limit. fEstimates for DMU 273 were combined with estimates for DMU 073.